Session Start: Wed Sep 16 22:01:33 2015
Session Ident: #dpacc
03[22:01] * Now talking in #dpacc
[22:01] <@varunfsl> hi Lingli
01[22:01] <Lingli_Deng> Hi Varun
[22:02] <@varunfsl> I am not able to join gotomeeting
01[22:02] <Lingli_Deng> Yes, I just notice the problem and advise to change to chatting here.
[22:02] <@varunfsl> I get an error message saying that the meeting id is invalid
01[22:02] <Lingli_Deng> So did I. I will check with it later.
[22:02] <@varunfsl> ok
01[22:02] <Lingli_Deng> Hope everybody sees my note in time.
03[22:03] * olli_ (d98c608c@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.140.96.140) has joined #dpacc
01[22:03] <Lingli_Deng> Hi, who is this?
03[22:03] * Keith_ (c0373725@gateway/web/freenode/ip.192.55.55.37) has joined #dpacc
01[22:03] <Lingli_Deng> Hello Keith.
[22:03] <Keith_> Hi Lingli
01[22:04] <Lingli_Deng> Let's wait a minute for everybody to come in.
03[22:04] * Rob (d98c608c@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.140.96.140) has joined #dpacc
03[22:04] * Magnus_ (86868b46@gateway/web/freenode/ip.134.134.139.70) has joined #dpacc
03[22:05] * jfender (~jfender@69-165-175-11.dsl.teksavvy.com) has joined #dpacc
[22:05] <Magnus_> Good morning everybody
[22:05] <Rob> Morning Magnus!
03[22:05] * subha-fsl (6bdfd219@gateway/web/freenode/ip.107.223.210.25) has joined #dpacc
03[22:05] * picnet (~lab@dsl-hkibrasgw4-54f857-89.dhcp.inet.fi) has joined #dpacc
[22:05] <Magnus_> Hi Rob. How are you?
[22:05] <picnet> Mike Rooke(Nokia) Here.
01[22:06] <Lingli_Deng> Hello. Would everybody identify yourself and affiliation when you coming in.
01[22:06] <Lingli_Deng> Thank you Mike.
[22:06] <Rob> Good thanks Magnus hope you're well
[22:06] <Keith_> Keith Wiles (Intel)
[22:06] <Rob> This is Rob Dimond from ARM
03[22:06] * jfender is now known as jfender-altera-
[22:06] <olli_> Ola Liljedahl from ARM
[22:06] <subha-fsl> Subha (Freescale)
[22:06] <Magnus_> Magnus Karlsson from Intel
03[22:06] * Kin-Yip (62d2713f@gateway/web/freenode/ip.98.210.113.63) has joined #dpacc
[22:07] <jfender-altera→ Josh Fender (Altera)
03[22:07] * picnet is now known as MikeR
01[22:08] <Lingli_Deng> Ola, is Bob coming today?
01[22:08] <Lingli_Deng> shall we wait for him?
[22:08] <olli_> I suppose so
[22:08] <MikeR> is there an associated voice call or are we chat only today?
[22:08] <olli_> I will check with Bob
[22:08] <Keith_> Lets wait and see a few minutes
[22:09] <Keith_> Today it is chat only 
01[22:09] <Lingli_Deng> I am sorry I am having problems with GTM, and don't have any backup for now.
03[22:10] * Bose (3ba3cafe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.59.163.202.254) has joined #dpacc
03[22:10] * mikeH (~mike@c-98-221-136-245.hsd1.nj.comcast.net) has joined #dpacc
[22:10] <olli_> And I liked GoToMeeting! Better than WebEx
03[22:11] * bob_ (d98c674b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.140.103.75) has joined #dpacc
01[22:11] <Lingli_Deng> I think we should get started now.
[22:11] <olli_> On IRC, nobody can hear you scream
[22:11] <Keith_> lol
[22:11] <bob_> ok…I am on
03[22:11] * Raj_ (7aa683ac@gateway/web/freenode/ip.122.166.131.172) has joined #dpacc
[22:11] <Keith_> or is it haha now
01[22:11] <Lingli_Deng> Hi Bob?
[22:11] <bob_> yes…I am here
01[22:12] <Lingli_Deng> Great. Sorry for the inconvenience.
01[22:12] <Lingli_Deng> Let us get started.
01[22:12] <Lingli_Deng> Before the big discussion over gAPI requirements. I have a few slides to share and discuss about.
01[22:12] <Lingli_Deng> Would everybody go to the wiki page and open the slides that I put there
01[22:13] <Lingli_Deng> https://wiki.opnfv.org/_media/dpacc/1_b-release_planning_for_dpacc_documentation.ppt
03[22:13] * BillFischofer (181c46ef@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.28.70.239) has joined #dpacc
01[22:13] <Lingli_Deng> on page 2, you can see the schedule of B-release
01[22:14] <Lingli_Deng> which is proposed by Debra of release project, and approved by TSC
02[22:14] * Bose (3ba3cafe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.59.163.202.254) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
01[22:14] <Lingli_Deng> As discussed last week, we applied to join in B-release project, for dpacc documentation.
01[22:15] <Lingli_Deng> To keep up the pace, we need to do two things in the following weeks as highlighted on this page.
01[22:15] <Lingli_Deng> AR1: identify work items and dependencies in Jira
01[22:15] <Lingli_Deng> AR2: upstream requirements published
02[22:15] * bob_ (d98c674b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.140.103.75) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
01[22:15] <Lingli_Deng> which are detailed in the following two pages
01[22:16] <Lingli_Deng> any questions on Page 2?
[22:16] <Keith_> None for me
01[22:16] <Lingli_Deng> I will give you a minute to read the table before we move to next page.
03[22:16] * Bose (3ba3cafe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.59.163.202.254) has joined #dpacc
01[22:17] <Lingli_Deng> Ok, next page.
01[22:17] <Lingli_Deng> for this week, we identify work items and dependencies in Jira
02[22:18] * Raj_ (7aa683ac@gateway/web/freenode/ip.122.166.131.172) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
03[22:18] * bob_ (d98c674b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.140.103.75) has joined #dpacc
[22:18] <bob_> hello?
[22:18] <bob_> ok…my echo is working again
02[22:18] * BillFischofer (181c46ef@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.28.70.239) Quit (Quit: Page closed)
01[22:19] <Lingli_Deng> for the current proposed 4 work items, please feedback you comments on the current proopsed dependencies.
01[22:19] <Lingli_Deng> @Bob, I will copy the previous notes to you privately.
[22:19] <bob_> i am back it seems
02[22:20] * Lingli_Deng (~LIngli@117.114.129.14) Quit (Excess Flood)
Session Close: Wed Sep 16 22:20:05 2015
Session Start: Wed Sep 16 22:20:05 2015
Session Ident: #dpacc
02[22:20] * Attempting to rejoin channel #dpacc
03[22:20] * Rejoined channel #dpacc
[22:20] <bob_> oh, i see the N/A
02[22:21] * Bose (3ba3cafe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.59.163.202.254) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
[22:21] <MikeR> high level requirements for various APIs as shown #1 slide 4.
01[22:21] <Lingli_Deng> sorry, I lost connection, back again.
[22:21] <Keith_> It looks like #3 is the only one that applies to us, right?
03[22:21] * netoptimizer (~netoptimi@x1-6-a4-2b-8c-a1-06-12.cpe.webspeed.dk) has joined #dpacc
[22:21] <bob_> I am not familiar with the IPSec benchmarkig in QTip
[22:21] <MikeR> slide 5 rather.
01[22:22] <Lingli_Deng> Bose, would you explain?
[22:22] <Keith_> QTip is just a test framework, it could apply if we have something to test
[22:22] <bob_> right, but is there a specific IPSec test that is being recommended?
[22:23] <bob_> as for traffic profiles…last I saw it was just a shell and no tests actually exists
01[22:23] <Lingli_Deng> That is to be worked on via cooperation between us and them.
[22:23] <bob_> but I have not seen a message since Ray P commneted the above
[22:23] <Keith_> I think they have a set of tests they use for IPSec, but you can always write a new one if I am not mistaken
[22:23] <Rob> The gap analysis would be against the requirements identified on the etherpad?
[22:24] <bob_> Rob..that is my assumption
01[22:24] <Lingli_Deng> it seems we are crossing the lines.
01[22:24] <Lingli_Deng> I am trying to soliciting feedback on Page 3.
01[22:24] <Lingli_Deng> Is it suggested that we remove dependencies from Functest and QTip?
[22:25] <Keith_> #3 applies and #4 applies if we have something to test
[22:25] <Keith_> I do not see it as a dependency at this time
[22:25] <subha-fsl> @Lingli, what is functest?
[22:25] <subha-fsl> Is there any document around that?
[22:25] <olli_> If we are providing something, it should be testable?
01[22:26] <Lingli_Deng> It is another OPNFV project, which would deliver a set of traffic profiles as output.
[22:26] <subha-fsl> It is possible to identify test cases for IPsec and give that input for Qtip
[22:26] <olli_> Or how do we know our delivery is fulfilling the requirements?
01[22:26] <Lingli_Deng> I am thinking of using their output, e.g. mobile traffic profile, for testing later.
[22:27] <Rob> I am not familiar with the details of the projects but it makes sense for there to be testing infrastructure that can show the benefit of acceleration
[22:27] <Keith_> The output from Qtip is the scripts and profiles, correct?
01[22:28] <Lingli_Deng> @Subha I don't think so, they are currently work-in-progress.
[22:28] <olli_> I would like to see one deliverable from DPACC being a VM guest/host interface for accessing accelerated crypto/IPSec
[22:28] <Keith_> I do not think we have a dependency on QTip only that we use the framework for any testing
[22:29] <Rob> @Keith: makes sense
03[22:29] * Bose (3ba3cafe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.59.163.202.254) has joined #dpacc
01[22:29] <Lingli_Deng> OK. I did not see Bose around. I will check with him later and come back.
03[22:29] * Mario_ (df3ed80d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.223.62.216.13) has joined #dpacc
01[22:30] <Lingli_Deng> Hi Bose, Keith is wondering if QTip outputs scripts and profiles?
01[22:30] <Lingli_Deng> woudl you help clarifying
[22:30] <Rob> I am glad to see virtio there I think this is an area where we can really make progress
[22:30] <bob_> Yes…if we can produce test cases for sample implementations, seems Qtip could useful facilitate testing.
03[22:31] * julien_ZTE (~zhang@121.237.227.193) has joined #dpacc
[22:31] <Keith_> Yes, virtio testing is a must and one of our main goals IMO
[22:31] <bob_> AGreed, Rob. We should propose to work on a sample virtio like crypto and test?
[22:31] <julien_ZTE> #info Julien
[22:31] <Bose> Currently QTIP is will be based on Ansible scripts
[22:32] <Magnus_> Agree that virtio-crypto is really interesting
[22:32] <bob_> Bose…does that mean custom tests can be built to use that scripting language to create tests of target software?>
[22:32] <Magnus_> Think there was a draft proposal from Freescale around this
[22:32] <Magnus_> a while back
[22:32] <bob_> I believ so, Magnus
[22:33] <subha-fsl> yes, there is on virtio-ipsec
[22:33] <olli_> yes. I think that is really the only meaningful deliverable we have as of now
[22:33] <Bose> Yes custom scripts can be used, but QTIP focuses only on performance measurements
[22:33] <Magnus_> Why not use that as a starting point
[22:33] <Magnus_> The goal should be for this to be upstreamed into Linux and Qemu
[22:33] <Magnus_> Linux/KVM
[22:34] <Magnus_> The proposal was on the IPSec level, but maybe we should start on the lower crypto level
[22:34] <olli_> So upstreaming is one acceptance test
01[22:34] <Lingli_Deng> Let us mark a AR here, gap analysis for virtio-ipsec. I need a volunteer to start and take care of the work.
[22:34] <bob_> Magnus could be right
[22:34] <Magnus_> ? Should have been a question 
[22:35] <Magnus_> Would like some help though
[22:35] <bob_> I am no tthe expert on the levels but perhaps lower cyrpto is a starting point
[22:35] <Magnus_> But my proposal is to start with virtio-crypto and then build IPSec on top of that
[22:35] <subha-fsl> Some of the virtio-ipsec messages can be re-used for virtio-crypto as well
[22:35] <Rob> I can see value in complete protocol offload (stateful) and stateless. I think that is Magnus' point?
[22:36] <Magnus_> Agree with Subha
[22:36] <bob_> Subha? FF?
[22:36] <subha-fsl> yes, agree. we can re-use the messages from virtio-ipsec
[22:36] <subha-fsl> we can add additional messages that may be needed for virtio-crypto
[22:36] <bob_> I seem to recall tht both FF and Freescale had proposed prototype concepts
[22:36] <subha-fsl> freescale proposal addresses lookaside accelerator
[22:37] <Magnus_> Where can I get FF's proposal?
[22:37] <olli_> pure crypto acceleration has to be lookaside
[22:37] <subha-fsl> agree with @rob complete offload would be an interesting to work
01[22:37] <Lingli_Deng> Yes, FF also indicated agreement with Freescale's proposal after the July hackfest.
[22:38] <bob_> I believe the proposals are archived, LingLi?
[22:38] <bob_> previous preso
[22:38] <Magnus_> But let us start to build this from the ground up
01[22:38] <Lingli_Deng> Great guys. looking forward to your contribution. Magnus and Subha.
[22:38] <Magnus_> Complete offload is interesting, but is that not step two?
[22:38] <olli_> "complete offload", do you mean IPsec protocol processing or inline IPsec
[22:38] <Magnus_> Virtio today is very basic. See it hard to get virtio-ipsec in there before something more basic like virtio-crypto
[22:39] <Rob> @Magnus: Yes I think we all agree
01[22:39] <Lingli_Deng> agreed.
[22:39] <Magnus_> Former
[22:39] <Mario_> Agreed
[22:39] <olli_> so step 1: plain virtio-crypto
[22:39] <subha-fsl> recommend we keep virtio-ipsec as baseline; re-use relevant messages and update virtio-ipsec as needed
[22:40] <Keith_> agreed
01[22:40] <Lingli_Deng> Let us keep the detailed discussion of today's meeting.
[22:40] <Magnus_> Agree with Subha
01[22:40] <Lingli_Deng> move on to next page, guys.
[22:41] <bob_> @subha, not sure what that means as baseline v doing the virtio-crypto as step 1
[22:41] <Keith_> Page #$?
[22:41] <Keith_> 4?
[22:41] <bob_> yes
01[22:41] <Lingli_Deng> Yes, as you can see,
01[22:42] <Lingli_Deng> no other comments on the proposed editor/care-taker for the docs?
[22:42] <bob_> I agree with the separation. high level reqs do not list out steps and do not dictate an implementations
01[22:42] <Lingli_Deng> Howard Huang for Openstack?
01[22:42] <Lingli_Deng> Keith for DPDK?
01[22:42] <Lingli_Deng> Bob for ODP?
[22:42] <bob_> gap analysis for proposed solution x and Y can enumrate gaps and etc
[22:42] <bob_> Yes…I will work with my team to assess ODP gaps
01[22:43] <Lingli_Deng> and Magnus for Virtio
[22:43] <bob_> we assume, againsts requirements?
01[22:43] <Lingli_Deng> Thanks Bob
01[22:43] <Lingli_Deng> Yes, that brings us to the last page.
01[22:43] <Lingli_Deng> Page 5.
01[22:44] <Lingli_Deng> there are questions about the dependencies to QTip and Functest. I will take an AR for further clarification.
[22:44] <bob_> work items? for which? deadline tomorrow seems tight
02[22:44] * Bose (3ba3cafe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.59.163.202.254) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
01[22:45] <Lingli_Deng> to move forward with gap analysis, we need to push the high level requirements ASAP
01[22:45] <Lingli_Deng> the proposed time points, any comments?
[22:46] <bob_> I am not clear on work items deadline
[22:46] <bob_> what work items?
[22:46] <Keith_> The times look fine, just not sure how to meet them today
[22:46] <bob_> AR1
[22:46] <olli_> @Magnus, could we help you with virtio-crypto?
01[22:46] <Lingli_Deng> @Bob back to page 2, according to the schedule of B-release
[22:47] <Magnus_> Yes please.
01[22:47] <Lingli_Deng> we need to fulfill three tasks the following two weeks
01[22:47] <Lingli_Deng> AR1 by this week, preferably.
[22:47] <Magnus_> I do not have any time this week to devote to this.
[22:47] <olli_> Good. Let's talk offline.
01[22:47] <Lingli_Deng> AR2 by next week (high level requirements), for the best.
[22:47] <olli_> Next week? I am on California…
[22:47] <Magnus_> Meeting with you guys on Friday plus travel.
[22:48] <Magnus_> I leave California on Sunday
02[22:48] * Mario_ (df3ed80d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.223.62.216.13) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
[22:48] <bob_> Many of us are in a week long conference next week and an all day meeting on Friday.
[22:49] <Magnus_> Linaro Connect next week?
[22:49] <bob_> tough deadlines and I am still not clear on what needs tobe created
[22:49] <bob_> for AR 1 ,,Jira cards?
[22:49] <bob_> I think we can clean up requirements by next week but htne need committer reveiw
01[22:49] <Lingli_Deng> I will create them based on our consensus.
[22:50] <olli_> @Magnus. Yes. Let's continue over email.
[22:50] <bob_> OK…let's just try to communicate and review on mailing list as much as possible
[22:50] <Magnus_> OK
[22:50] <bob_> That to LingLi
01[22:51] <Lingli_Deng> OK
01[22:51] <Lingli_Deng> Any other comments to the slides?
[22:51] <bob_> I do not think so.
[22:51] <Keith_> Am good with the slides, but it going to be hard to meet the deadlines
01[22:52] <Lingli_Deng> If not, I will leave it to Keith and Bob for gAPI requirements.
[22:52] <bob_> @Keith..agreed
[22:52] <bob_> Ok, so Bill, Rob, Keith and I need to try to clean up requirements by Monday
[22:53] <bob_> But we will want to remove implementations from requriements
[22:53] <@varunfsl> I am not clear on the comparison between the virtio-crypto and virtio-ipsec. Virtio-ipsec is stateful, whereas a virtio-crypto device could be stateless
[22:53] <bob_> then committers can review and ratify
03[22:54] * Magnus (86868b46@gateway/web/freenode/ip.134.134.139.70) has joined #dpacc
[22:54] <olli_> So virtio-crypto could be simpler
03[22:54] * Keith (86868b4a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.134.134.139.74) has joined #dpacc
02[22:54] * Magnus_ (86868b46@gateway/web/freenode/ip.134.134.139.70) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
[22:54] <Magnus> @olli got kicked out so missed your conversation
[22:54] <bob_> I will repeat my statement re requirements
[22:55] <olli_> Although we might opt to make it very similar to virtio-ipsec anyway
[22:55] <bob_> Keith, Bill, Rob D and I need to try and close requirements by Monday ish
[22:55] <Keith> OK, back. @bob please update the gapis and we can discuss those changes later
[22:55] <bob_> But we want to be clear that we want all implmentation spoecifications/dictates removed from requirements.
[22:55] <bob_> This is requirements 101
[22:55] <olli_> I responded to Varun's comment on virtio-crypto could be stateless. Which is good because we could make the interface simpler
[22:56] <bob_> sounds good Keith
[22:56] <@varunfsl> but don't agree with the point about pushing virtio crypto upstream as a base of virtio-ipsec
02[22:56] * Keith_ (c0373725@gateway/web/freenode/ip.192.55.55.37) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
03[22:56] * Mario_ (7be452ec@gateway/web/freenode/ip.123.228.82.236) has joined #dpacc
[22:56] <@varunfsl> upstream
[22:56] <bob_> OK…we lsot Keith it seems…We will be discussing this Friday Lingli
[22:56] <bob_> I need to run
[22:56] <@varunfsl> they can exist in parallel
[22:56] <Magnus> Anything we do with Linux or other open source has to go upstream
01[22:57] <Lingli_Deng> thanks Bob.
02[22:57] * bob_ (d98c674b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.140.103.75) Quit (Quit: Page closed)
[22:57] <olli_> as a base doesn't have to mean as a technical abse where virtio-ipsec builds upon virtio-crypto.
[22:58] <olli_> virtio-crypto could just be a base for our efforts of extending virtio, building credibility and simplify future extensions.
[22:58] <subha-fsl> @varun, yes they can exist in parallel. @Magnus: agree we need to make it available upstream
[22:58] <olli_> But start with something simple
01[22:58] <Lingli_Deng> Keith?
[22:58] <@varunfsl> we have started with POC for virtio-ipsec
[22:59] <olli_> @varunfsl good
[22:59] <olli_> But a POC does not have to be based on upstreamable code.
01[23:00] <Lingli_Deng> @subha any progress with usecase doc?
[23:00] <Rob> @varunfsl always useful to learn from a POC. You should work with Ola and Magnus
02[23:01] * Keith (86868b4a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.134.134.139.74) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
[23:01] <@varunfsl> ok
[23:02] <subha-fsl> @Lingli: I should have a version out today or tomorrow
[23:02] <Magnus> This time I got kicked out of my physical room
[23:02] <subha-fsl> I will upload to the DPACC wiki
[23:02] <Magnus> Back again
01[23:04] <Lingli_Deng> thanks, Subha
01[23:05] <Lingli_Deng> Time is up for today.
01[23:05] <Lingli_Deng> Thanks everyone for joining.
03[23:06] * jfender-altera- (~jfender@69-165-175-11.dsl.teksavvy.com) has left #dpacc
02[23:06] * MikeR (~lab@dsl-hkibrasgw4-54f857-89.dhcp.inet.fi) Quit (Quit: ircII EPIC4-2.10.5 – Are we there yet?)
01[23:06] <Lingli_Deng> Bye.
